SANT KUMAR Vs. SMT. SEWAN DEVI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge, Kangra striking off the defence of the Petitioner in a suit.

(2.) IN a suit for money the Petitioner filed a written statement disputing his liability to pay. The learned Subordinate Judge directed the presence of the parties. The Defendant was not present and on March 5, 1975 the case was adjourned subject to payment of costs. On March 26, 1975 the learned Subordinate Judge made an order nothing that the costs had not been paid and that the Defendant had not appeared as directed. Consequently he struck off the defence, purporting to act under Order 10, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That order is assailed by this revision petition.

(3.) IN regard to the first objection, it will be noted that Order 43 Rule 1(e) of the Code provides that an appeal lies against an order under Order 10, Rule 4 pronouncing judgment against a party. The question is whether the impugned order can be described as a 'judgment' under Order 10, Rule 4. Order 10, Rule 4 of the Code provides: